Jay Schulz [Merged]

[Merveille]

We have been very patient with Kelvin Moore who is now rewarding us for our tolerance, and many on here forget that Jay is a year younger than Moore.

I would have no hesitation in saying Jay is playing much better at the same age than what Moore was, Moore showed us very little last year. If Jay continues to improve the way he has over the last 6 months and kicks on the way Moore has, we could have a very handy player on our hands.

No doubt he hasn't lived up to his high teens draft position and some early promise, but I think Jay is just starting to find his feet at AFL level. Plus he has a few rare attributes at the Tigers, he is over 190 cms tall, despite the occasional shank his kicking effeciency is very good, and he can break a pack and do some damage unlike "Clean Knees Cleve".

In addition he plays the packs like a rover at times, no other Tigers player over 6 foot 2 spends as much time on his knees at the bottom of packs, feeding out handballs to the outside mids, the way Schulz does.

I think he is a keeper.

i agree, well said

 

[the claw]

oh by the way in not saying get rid of players after two yrs i have never once said this and i have not said if a player has not made it after 4yr he should automatically be delisted. i have said outside of extenuating circumstances injury for instance, after 4 yrs if a player has not shown steady improvement we need to move him on again i state this is not written in stone.

 

[Tigermad2005]

oh by the way in not saying get rid of players after two yrs i have never once said this and i have not said if a player has not made it after 4yr he should automatically be delisted. i have said outside of extenuating circumstances injury for instance, after 4 yrs if a player has not shown steady improvement we need to move him on again i state this is not written in stone.

He would have got better every year if we had someone at the club who know what a KPP looked like.

 

[the claw]

We have been very patient with Kelvin Moore who is now rewarding us for our tolerance, and many on here forget that Jay is a year younger than Moore.

I would have no hesitation in saying Jay is playing much better at the same age than what Moore was, Moore showed us very little last year. If Jay continues to improve the way he has over the last 6 months and kicks on the way Moore has, we could have a very handy player on our hands.

No doubt he hasn't lived up to his high teens draft position and some early promise, but I think Jay is just starting to find his feet at AFL level. Plus he has a few rare attributes at the Tigers, he is over 190 cms tall, despite the occasional shank his kicking effeciency is very good, and he can break a pack and do some damage unlike "Clean Knees Cleve".

In addition he plays the packs like a rover at times, no other Tigers player over 6 foot 2 spends as much time on his knees at the bottom of packs, feeding out handballs to the outside mids, the way Schulz does.

I think he is a keeper.

moore and schulz are chalk and cheese. moore was rookie listed in 2003. and played 9 very promising games to the end of o4 when he was promoted to the senior list. after that had every injury under the sun including a broken jaw. getting the body right and the subsequent confidence gained from this has finally seen moore show the obvious talent he has.

 

[the claw]

He would have got better every year if we had someone at the club who know what a KPP looked like.

i disagree its up to the players to do the work and show they can play and apply themselves at this level schulz has not done this.
6yrs people cmon common sense says its to long to keep underperforming players.

 

[Merveille]

moore and schulz are chalk and cheese. moore was rookie listed in 2003. and played 9 very promising games to the end of o4 when he was promoted to the senior list. after that had every injury under the sun including a broken jaw. getting the body right and the subsequent confidence gained from this has finally seen moore show the obvious talent he has.

Schulz also had a badly broken ankle, and copped several (2?) concussions (Aaron Hamill was one), and a few other injuries. Has been a long road but just getting some continuity now. Also drink drive saga - has had an interrupted time not helped by a lack of confidence from Wallace

 

[PurpleSneakers]

Schulz is just impersonating a KPP, he's actually a small in a KP's body, think of him as just another of the many flankers that we have.

Chris Naish had more physical presence in a marking contest than Schulz does.

 

[ZeroGame]

moore and schulz are chalk and cheese. moore was rookie listed in 2003. and played 9 very promising games to the end of o4 when he was promoted to the senior list. after that had every injury under the sun including a broken jaw. getting the body right and the subsequent confidence gained from this has finally seen moore show the obvious talent he has.

Sorry claw but Jay has had just as bad a luck with injuries as Moore has. Broken ankle, broken collarbone, shoulder reconstruction. The guy gets injured by putting his body on the line.

 

[ZeroGame]

Schulz is just impersonating a KPP, he's actually a small in a KP's body, think of him as just another of the many flankers that we have.

Chris Naish had more physical presence in a marking contest than Schulz does.

You have to be kidding, Schulz is one of the more physical players we have in the side. He's always throwing himself into packs.

 

[Merveille]

Sorry claw but Jay has had just as bad a luck with injuries as Moore has. Broken ankle, broken collarbone, shoulder reconstruction. The guy gets injured by putting his body on the line.

yeah forgot about the shoulder, thought there was another one.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Schulz is just impersonating a KPP, he's actually a small in a KP's body, think of him as just another of the many flankers that we have.

Chris Naish had more physical presence in a marking contest than Schulz does.

One of the dumbest posts I have read on here in a long time.

He may just be learning how to play defence but he does have presence in a pack situation.
He is also one of our few players who will put on a hard bump. Have a look at his 1%s stats too. He's regularly up near the top.

 

[IanG]

w2hat even duds. imo you dont keep duds under any circumstances.

Schulz isn't a dud, he's serviceable until we can build up a better base. And anyone who thinks we could get Lisle, Hurley, Vickery and Trengrove in the one draft is fooling themselves.

 

[linuscambridge]

oh by the way in not saying get rid of players after two yrs i have never once said this and i have not said if a player has not made it after 4yr he should automatically be delisted. i have said outside of extenuating circumstances injury for instance, after 4 yrs if a player has not shown steady improvement we need to move him on again i state this is not written in stone.

Sorry Claw but the practical application of your theories simply does not stack up. You have consistantly called for the churning of around 12 players on the Tigers list every year I have been reading this forum. Now the Tigers haven't been that far behind your request and have turned over a huge number of players since Terry came on board.

However, if you turn over 12 players a year every year there is very little mathematical chance you can still field a team of 22 senior players and also give the younger players a maximum of 4 years to develop. Try and do the maths on that one, I cannot see how you can make it work?

I respect your opinion on the need for more key position players, I have my own intolerance of players with poor kicking skills. But you have previously predicted a 50% success rate when drafting these 12 players every year. Assuming that you have at best 3 picks inside the top 50, how do you then achieve a 50% success rate with draftees who don't rank in the top 50 juniors in the country? Realistically it is probably more like one or two in every 10.

Yet again, if these 12 get their 4 years on the list to prove themselves, and only a couple of them come good, your maths on list management just doesn't stack up. We would have more duds on our list than ever before!!

We can settle this one though with a simple exercise, at the end of this year you give us a realistic 12 players from the draft and we can follow their success over 4 years. Don't worry, I will remember who they are. At the end of four years we can see how your success rate stacks up against the 3 or 4 players the Tigers will probably take in the draft, and the Claw defined duds like Jay Schulz.

I'm not having a crack at you, happy to tip my hat to you if you pull it off Claw, but I don't think your method of churning the players trully works in a practical sense. What do you think?

 

[tigertrue]

Schulz - one of the best contributors on the weekend.

 

[K3]

I am with the positive posters here, easily! IMO Jay has made some real improvements this year (even though he has been shunted around a little bit) and is heading in the right direction. Whilst I too would like to see him be a bit 'more' physical, I think he is far from soft and is happy to lay a hard tackle, go in with a hip and shoulder as well as crash a pack or five.

Keep up the great work Jay and I look forward to seeing you finish off the season strongly.

 

[BladeTiger]

If Schulz was given the same armchair ride as Terry's other "favorites" we wouldn't even be having this debate.

As was said earlier, Schulz is a real rarity at Tigerland, 190+cm, can take a mark, apply physical presence, pinch hit forward when required and kick accurately with both feet. No wonder he isn't one of Terry's "favorites".

 

[Eat the rich]

oh by the way in not saying get rid of players after two yrs i have never once said this and i have not said if a player has not made it after 4yr he should automatically be delisted. i have said outside of extenuating circumstances injury for instance, after 4 yrs if a player has not shown steady improvement we need to move him on again i state this is not written in stone.

Like Moses , coming down the mountain with exclusion clawses

 

[mb64]

Trade

 

[Dyer Disciple]

Play needs to be played on the wing and when we play against loose sides like fremantle and melbourne be the " free man" in the half back line for those last two games.

Get his possession / mark / presence right up.

Then trade him.

I was on the Schulz bandwagon, but I'm off it now.

 

[Phar Ace]

Then trade him.

I was on the Schulz bandwagon, but I'm off it now.

Like you, had a good feeling about Jay in the first year - remember him coming off the bench in his first gallop against Melbourne - he was more physical then I reckon. His second season was still OK but saw signs of him being very one dimensional (dumb as a footballer).

Got off the bandwagon after his second season - went backwards.

Have wanted a trade for him ever since.

Has he become servicable? Maybe, but we still don't really know though do we? Pick 29 from Port last season was a monty of an offer - might get lucky this season - but with Polak doubtful - our cry for more KPP's remain unanswered and this might just be his saving grace for yet another season :. Personally I'd take my chances and accept a pick 25-40 and use it on replacement potential KPP - won't do much worse - could hit the jackpot this draft!